All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelf@ti.com>
Cc: Daniel Mack <zonque@gmail.com>,
	linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gururaja Hebbar <gururaja.hebbar@ti.com>,
	balajitk@ti.com, s.neumann@raumfeld.com,
	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>, Russ Dill <Russ.Dill@ti.com>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>,
	Vaibhav Bedia <vaibhav.bedia@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ARM: omap: edma: add suspend suspend/resume hooks
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 10:51:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wqkiafs0.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <527D0DE6.6090506@ti.com> (Joel Fernandes's message of "Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:14:30 -0600")

Joel Fernandes <joelf@ti.com> writes:

> On 11/08/2013 12:28 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> [..]
>>>> Also, I believe it was already suggested by Nishanth, but the late/early
>>>> callbacks are probably more appropriate here than the noirq callbacks.
>>>> Unless there's a *really* good reason to use the noirq callbacks, they
>>>> should be avoided.
>>>>
>>>> That being said, I wonder if the whole approach here is the right one.
>>>> I know you're basing your stuff on some TI tree, but that doesn't make
>>>> it the right way (usually, it's the opposite, but I digress...)  ;)
>>>>
>>>> IMO, EDMA should be done like we currently do I2C and not implement
>>>> suspend/resume at all.  Instead, the driver should do runtime PM done on
>>>
>>> But a potential problem with this is powering edma on or off between xfers may
>>> slow things down quite a bit because xfers happen so much often and there is
>>> some overhead in the pm_runtime calls which adds up overtime when dealing with
>>> something as frequent as EDMA. Also we would lose the global EDMA context right
>>> so we'd have to restore the context every time during runtime PM (?).
>> 
>> Have a look at the autosuspend feature of runtime PM.  (c.f.
>> Documentation/power/pm_runtime.txt)
>
> Sure, will do that. Thanks :)
>
> Just one more silly question, in very frequent operations is there no over-head
> even when using autosuspend? Because when I traced last time (without
> autosuspend), the depth of pm runtime calls were quite a lot but this could also
> be because of the OMAP implementation.

The depth of calls is shallow until it's actually time to really runtime
suspend (after the autosuspend timeout.)  IOW, you don't even get into
OMAP specific code until the autosuspend timeout expires, so the
overhead is only coming from the runtime PM core, and is very minimal.

We're already using this technique in the I2C driver which typically has
less data than EDMA, but does have frequent, bursty xfers.

Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@linaro.org (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5] ARM: omap: edma: add suspend suspend/resume hooks
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 10:51:11 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wqkiafs0.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <527D0DE6.6090506@ti.com> (Joel Fernandes's message of "Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:14:30 -0600")

Joel Fernandes <joelf@ti.com> writes:

> On 11/08/2013 12:28 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> [..]
>>>> Also, I believe it was already suggested by Nishanth, but the late/early
>>>> callbacks are probably more appropriate here than the noirq callbacks.
>>>> Unless there's a *really* good reason to use the noirq callbacks, they
>>>> should be avoided.
>>>>
>>>> That being said, I wonder if the whole approach here is the right one.
>>>> I know you're basing your stuff on some TI tree, but that doesn't make
>>>> it the right way (usually, it's the opposite, but I digress...)  ;)
>>>>
>>>> IMO, EDMA should be done like we currently do I2C and not implement
>>>> suspend/resume at all.  Instead, the driver should do runtime PM done on
>>>
>>> But a potential problem with this is powering edma on or off between xfers may
>>> slow things down quite a bit because xfers happen so much often and there is
>>> some overhead in the pm_runtime calls which adds up overtime when dealing with
>>> something as frequent as EDMA. Also we would lose the global EDMA context right
>>> so we'd have to restore the context every time during runtime PM (?).
>> 
>> Have a look at the autosuspend feature of runtime PM.  (c.f.
>> Documentation/power/pm_runtime.txt)
>
> Sure, will do that. Thanks :)
>
> Just one more silly question, in very frequent operations is there no over-head
> even when using autosuspend? Because when I traced last time (without
> autosuspend), the depth of pm runtime calls were quite a lot but this could also
> be because of the OMAP implementation.

The depth of calls is shallow until it's actually time to really runtime
suspend (after the autosuspend timeout.)  IOW, you don't even get into
OMAP specific code until the autosuspend timeout expires, so the
overhead is only coming from the runtime PM core, and is very minimal.

We're already using this technique in the I2C driver which typically has
less data than EDMA, but does have frequent, bursty xfers.

Kevin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-11-08 18:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-07 22:32 [PATCH v5] ARM: omap: edma: add suspend suspend/resume hooks Daniel Mack
2013-11-07 22:32 ` Daniel Mack
2013-11-08  0:02 ` Kevin Hilman
2013-11-08  0:02   ` Kevin Hilman
2013-11-08  4:58   ` Joel Fernandes
2013-11-08  4:58     ` Joel Fernandes
2013-11-08  6:28     ` Kevin Hilman
2013-11-08  6:28       ` Kevin Hilman
2013-11-08 16:14       ` Joel Fernandes
2013-11-08 16:14         ` Joel Fernandes
2013-11-08 18:03         ` Nishanth Menon
2013-11-08 18:03           ` Nishanth Menon
2013-11-08 18:51         ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2013-11-08 18:51           ` Kevin Hilman
2013-11-08  7:59   ` Daniel Mack
2013-11-08  7:59     ` Daniel Mack

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87wqkiafs0.fsf@linaro.org \
    --to=khilman@linaro.org \
    --cc=Russ.Dill@ti.com \
    --cc=balajitk@ti.com \
    --cc=gururaja.hebbar@ti.com \
    --cc=joelf@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
    --cc=s.neumann@raumfeld.com \
    --cc=vaibhav.bedia@gmail.com \
    --cc=zonque@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.